Managing Conflicts in the Organisation - Case Study Example

Title: Managing conflict in the organization: A case study Student’s Name: Institutional Affiliation: Date Submitted: Managing conflict in the organization: A case study Abstract The paper looks at the conflict in Gladstone university department of finance. The introduction defines the term conflict and gives some types of conflicts experienced in an organization. The paper then looks at the conflict in the Gladstone University discussing the conflict at length. The main players in the conflict are identified. Also identified are he main issues in the conflict. The main issues that feed conflict in the department are the perceived discrimination of men. In other words, Mike, One of the main players into the conflict, thinks that women are being favored in the department. Another main issue is the emotionalism of the two principal players. The proposed management strategies of the conflict are also given. The conclusion is a call to the managements of organizations to contain conflicts as soon as they emerge. This is because conflicts are exceedingly damaging to the organization. Introduction Self managing teams in organizations present various problems. Conflict in the work place is defined as the process that begins with the perceived frustration of one party by another. This is because self managing team’s structural design produces conflicts. These conflicts can be task conflicts; these are the disagreements of the group members on view points, opinions and ideas. More often than not, the conflicts are going to be relational. Relational conflicts are defined as the discernment of interpersonal incompatibilities among the group members (Langfred 2007, p.885-900). The other type of conflict that manifests in self managing teams is process conflict. Process conflict is strong divergent of opinion as to how a process should proceed. Conflict is one of the things that the management in any organization tries to prevent. Conflict is counterproductive. Conflict in the organization is potentially harmful to group processes such as performance, cooperation and coordination. Conflict negatively affects trust and also lowers autonomy (Langfred 2007, p.885-900). The problem The finance department in Gladstone University is a self managing team. The department is further divided into smaller divisions that are all self managing. Since five years back, the department has been undergoing key restructuring transformations. Some of the employees who have been in the department are Jess and Mike. Both employees entered the department roughly at the same time. Five years ago, Jess was promoted to a senior position within the department. Jess’s promotion into a senior position has not gone down well with Mike. He feels discriminated for not having been chosen for a senior position in the company. A few months after the promotion of Jess mike said remarkably hurtful things to her. They have been trying to avoid each other since that time. All the time Mike feels that Jess has been trying to thwart his attempts to get into a senior position. The two have been trying to avoid each other since that incident five years ago. The two do not trust each other at all. They have been having a relational conflict. As outlined in the introduction, relational conflict is characterized by the perception of incompatibility among group members. This has been the case at the finance department between Mike and Jess. This is because this conflict has lowered the trust these two team workers have had for one another. This is because alike all self managing teams, the finance department tasks are structured to be complementary. Mike supplies reports to Jess that she uses to compile her work. Mike complains that the reports that Jess produces are irrelevant, that they are useless. On the other hand, Mike needs these reports to compile the monthly revenue collection reports. Because of the relational nature of the conflict, the conflict has also degenerated into emotional conflict (Glinow, Shapiro & Brett 2004, p.580-83). This is characterized by negative emotions such as anger, irritation and frustration. This normally occurs in heterogeneous teams due to interpretative barriers (Fisher & Ury 1981, p.79). This has proved to be highly dysfunctional of the team especially in performing team related tasks (Glinow, Shapiro & Brett 2004, p.580-83). This is because the tasks of a team in a department are independent of the tasks other departments. Thus, although the tasks of the team members are autonomous, they are also interdependent (Langfred 2007, p.885-900). This is because autonomy is considered to be a central part of the job design. This does not mean the aggregation of individual autonomy. It is the autonomy of the team tasks.Thus, in the case of Mike and Jess, their conflict has caused intense suffering of the work in the finance department. This is because the university is a large institution. Their squabbling has decreased the performance in the department. The division head, Lathan, has been having problems coordinating the team properly due to the conflict between the two. Cooperation in the department has also gone down considerably. This conflict is threatening to polarize the department as the two have supporters in the department. Mike keeps sending his hurting messages to Jess. They two are suffering for this conflict. This is because the spouse of Jess is tired of seeing his wife come home drained because of the taunts of Mike. He has tried reconciliation by arranging for the two to meet and talk, but it has not born any fruits. Mike is also paying heavily for the conflict. The departmental grapevine has it that he is filling for work related stress leave. Mediation between the two has been tried to no avail. When they meet to talk over the conflict, the meeting ends up as a confrontation, and a shouting match. The players In this scenario at the Gladstone University, the two principal players are Mike and Jess. Mike is the principal initiator of the conflict. This is because Mike is the one who has been instrumental in claiming that Jess has been hindering is ascension in the work place. He is also the one who has been hurt by the promotion of Jess into a senior position in the department. Mike is the one who says hurtful things about the promotion of Jess. He is also the one who keeps saying that the reports that Jess prepares are insufficient. Jess, on the other hand, has been emotional in the process of trying to mange the conflict. This is because she cannot stay calm whenever the two meet to solve the conflict. The perception of Mike is that the department is discriminating against men and him in particular. His perception is that he is discriminated against because he has been trying to secure a senior position to no avail. The two have adopted the avoidance model of managing the conflict (Wiseman 1978, p.138). This is a low level conflict management mode that is characterized by extremely low trust. Mutual feelings of intense distrust and hatred also signify this mode of conflict management (Wiseman 1978, p.138). Main issues in the conflict As mentioned in describing the main players in the team, the main issue in this conflict is the perceived discrimination of males in the department. According to Mike, he has been passed over for discrimination in the department because the department has been favoring women in promotions. That is the reason he has been passed over for promotion despite his numerous attempts in securing a senior position. The other issue although it is not a major issue is the emotionalism of the principal players. This is the reason that has made them start avoiding each other. Management strategy There are various frame works for managing a conflict like this that has plagued the finance department of Gladstone University. Two prominent models for conflict management include the process model and the structural model (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). Each model is used to address the uniqueness of each individual conflict. The conflict resolution strategy that is best suited for the management of this conflict is the process model of conflict management. This method calls to account the appreciation of cognition in handling conflicts. The emphasis is laid on thinking about the underlying interests and not to think of the positions of the players in the conflict. The elements that shape conflict management in the process model are thoughts, conflict awareness, intentions, behavior, emotions and consequences (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). This model of conflict management calls for normative reasoning. This is because intentions come between cognitive logic and overt behavior. Two basic methods of reasoning underlie this model. This is because reasoning shapes intentions and portrays behavior (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). The first kind of reasoning is the instrumental or rational thinking that suggests that individuals tend to pick behavioral acts that will result in intended result. In this case, Mike has chosen a subtle kind of upward bullying in order to push Jess out of the organization. In pursuit of this model of process conflict management, the thing to do is to call the two warring parties together. This meeting is to address the grievances the two have against each other in the guidance of an outsider who has not been party to this conflict at any given point. The two parties, Jess and Mike, are called to give the perception of the conflict in a neutral environment. The two should meet in a neutral place that is not poisoned by bitter memories (Fishbein & Ajzen 1975, p.116). An experienced conflict manager then must lead then in exploring the conflict step by step. All the events that have contributed to the conflict must be addressed by the parties involved in the conflict. The emotions that have also been instrumental must be addressed in the meeting. Perceptions should be explored together in order to solve the conflict. The choice of the time frame is crucial to the success of this strategy. This is because the conflict has been also enmeshed in emotional turmoil. Thus, the mediator, or facilitator, must choose a time frame that is emotionally less charged. This is because emotions have a way of hijacking the rational brain. Small negative emotional triggers can destroy a conflict management strategy (Neale & Bazerman 1991, p.135). In handling this conflict, the collaborative ethic should be used with a measure of caution. This is because the collaborative ethic in conflict management is counterproductive (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). This is because it produces a set of superior outcomes that might be good in the short term, and harmful in the long term (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). The collaborative ethic produces satisfaction, and self esteem. In the case of Mike and Jess, it should be noted that Mike is looking for the competitive incentive. He feels discriminated against and satisfying him fully his only to inflame him more. Thus, blame must be apportioned to the guilty without remorse in this situation. The expectations of the University of its Employees should also be explored in the meeting between the two. The effects of their squabbling should be tabled. This is especially so in the issue of he reports that Mike claims to be useless. Doing this will open the eyes the players as to the effect of their conflict in the department and what it will mean for both of them career wise. This will open their eyes to the consequence and rationality will be restored in the relationship (Gladwin & Walter 1980, p.214). In managing this conflict, all strategies should be used. This is because as the paper has said elsewhere, this conflict is potentially explosive in the department. The management can try forcing their authority in solving this conflict Filley 1975, p.54). The two principal players can be forced to settle their differences, or face the risk of sacrificing their careers. This alternative is likely to favor Mike who wants Jess to leave the organization. Thus, it might not be the best option although it might bring some results. The other strategy that should be tried in resolving this conflict is accommodation. This will involve giving a resolution that will pacify the conflict without satisfying either party fully. In this scenario, it might involve getting both Jess and Mike to consider the implications of their conflict in the long run. Whatever conflict resolution strategy is adopted it is useful to point out some beneficial facts. The two players should be guided to see the positive longer view. Mike and Jess should be shown the import for their careers and the department if they stay out of the conflict. They should be encouraged to take the high road in this conflict (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). They should be made to understand the vision and mission of the department. In doing so they should also be made to review their own visions and missions in life. Through this strategy, they will see that the conflict is only hindering their progress in life (Thomas 1992, p.265-274). Conflicts thrive on anger; the anger that drives this conflict is Mike’s in inability to make it to a senior position. Finding a way to deal with Mikes’ anger and perceived discrimination will kill the conflict in the finance department.Finally, the conflict negotiator must make sure that the two make and keep some agreements before thy leave the negotiation room. Conclusion Conflicts are bound to happen in organizations. The question is what to do when they happen. This is because the management of a conflict is crucial to an organization (Filley 1975, p.54). Conflicts to mush to lower production in any place; this is because they sap the energy to work and they destroy relationships. It is estimated that about a half of all employee turnover are due to work place conflicts (Filley 1975, p.54). The organization that commits resources in managing conflict saves a lot of money in the long run. Conflict management requires specialized skill that can not be assumed. It is imperative that the managers in an organization get the requisite skills in conflict management (Hall 1969, p.73).The trend in some organizations of avoiding conflict resolution is extremely destructive. Those managers who distance themselves from conflicts happening in their organizations are not fulfilling their responsibilities. This is because they allow conflicts to simmer from the discomfort level to the crisis level. This way the organization suffers. Conflicts should be dealt with decisively at the first instance when they appear. References Filley, A, C 1975, Interpersonal Conflict Resolution, Scott, Foreman, Glenview, IL, pp 54. Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I, 1975, Belief, Attitude and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 116. Fisher, R and Ury, W. 1981, Getting to YES: Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In, Houghton Miflftin, Boston, pp 79. Gladwin, N and Walter, I. 1980, Multinationals under Fire: Lessons in the Management of Conflict, Wiley, New York, pp 214. Glinow, M, Shapiro, Brett, 2004, Can we talk, and should we? Managing emotional conflict in multicultural teams Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29, No. 4, 580-83. Hall, J, 1969, Conflict Management Survey, Teleometrics, Conroe, TX, pp 73. Langfred, W, 2007, The downside of self-management: a longitudinal study of the effects of conflict on trust, autonomy, and task interdependence in self-managing teams, Academy of Management Journal , Vol. 50, No. 4, 885–900. Neale, M. and Bazerman, M, 1991, Cognition and Rationality in Negotiation, Free Press, New York, pp 135. Thomas, K, W 1992, Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update Journal of organizational behavior, vol. 13, 265-274. Wiseman, J, W 1978, 'Reconciling "incompatible" positions'. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 14(6), 138. Read More